[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 36 (Tuesday, February 24, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9163-9165]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-4249]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96-NM-248-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Airbus Model A310 series 
airplanes. This proposal would require repetitive inspections of the 
fuselage skin to detect corrosion or fatigue cracking around and under 
the chafing plates of the wing root; and corrective actions, if 
necessary. This proposal is prompted by issuance of mandatory 
continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil airworthiness 
authority. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to 
detect and correct fatigue cracks and corrosion around and under 
chafing plates of the wing root,

[[Page 9164]]

which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by March 26, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-248-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 
Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Norman B. Martenson, International 
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, 
SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2110; fax (425) 
227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 96-NM-248-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and 
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-1114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 96-NM-248-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    The Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the 
airworthiness authority for France, notified the FAA that an unsafe 
condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A310 series airplanes. The 
DGAC advises that it has received reports from operators of the 
presence of corrosion under the chafing plates and around the fasteners 
of the wing root between fuselage frames (FR) 36 and FR 39. 
Investigation revealed that the corrosion damage was due to moisture 
penetrating into the sealant between the fuselage skin and the 
stainless steel chafing plates. This corrosion damage is accelerated by 
the galvanic activity created by the aluminum skin and the stainless 
steel plates. If corrosion is present, the area is susceptible to 
fatigue cracking. Such corrosion and fatigue cracking, if not detected 
and corrected in a timely manner, could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A310-53-2069, Revision 1, dated 
September 19, 1995, which describes procedures for repetitive 
inspections to detect corrosion and fatigue cracking around and under 
the chafing plates of the wing root between fuselage FR 36 and FR 39; 
and corrective actions, if necessary.
    Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A310-53-2070, dated October 
3, 1994, which describes procedures for replacement of the stainless 
steel chafing plates with new chafing plates made of aluminum alloy. 
Accomplishment of the replacement would eliminate the need for the 
repetitive inspections described in the previous service bulletin.
    Accomplishment of the actions specified in these service bulletins 
is intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition. The 
DGAC classified Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2069, Revision 1, dated 
September 19, 1995, as mandatory, and issued French airworthiness 
directive 96-008-175(B), dated January 3, 1996, in order to assure the 
continued airworthiness of these airplanes in France.

FAA's Conclusions

    This airplane model is manufactured in France and is type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this 
bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed 
of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of 
the DGAC, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD 
action is necessary for products of this type design that are 
certificated for operation in the United States.

Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design registered 
in the United States, the proposed AD would require accomplishment of 
the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A310-52-2070 described 
previously, except as discussed below. The proposed AD also provides 
for an optional replacement, which would constitute terminating action 
for the repetitive inspection requirements.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Related Service 
Bulletin

    Airbus Service Bulletin A310-52-2070 specifies that appropriate 
corrective action may be obtained by contacting the manufacturer, 
Airbus, directly. However, this proposed AD would require that any such 
repair be accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the FAA.

Cost Impact

    The FAA estimates that 36 airplanes of U.S. registry would be 
affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately 68 work 
hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, and that the 
average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be 
$146,880, or $4,080 per inspection cycle.
    Should an operator elect to accomplish the optional terminating 
action rather than continue the repetitive inspections, it would take 
approximately 45 work hours per airplane to accomplish the 
modification, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required 
parts would cost approximately $2,229 per airplane. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of this optional terminating action is 
estimated to be $4,929 per airplane.

[[Page 9165]]

    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements 
of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions 
in the future if this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in 
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this 
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant 
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 
and (3) if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact, 
positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under 
the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as 
follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.


Sec. 39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 96-NM-248-AD.

    Applicability: Model A310 series airplanes on which Airbus 
Modifications 8888 and 8889 have not been accomplished; certificated 
in any category.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the 
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, 
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of 
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an 
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of 
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of 
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been 
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to 
address it.

    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct fatigue cracking and corrosion around and 
under chafing plates of the wing root between fuselage frames (FR) 
36 and FR 39, which could result in reduced structural integrity of 
the airplane, accomplish the following:
    (a) Except as provided by paragraph (b) of this AD: Within 4 
years since date of manufacture, or within 12 months after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform an 
inspection to detect discrepancies around and under the chafing 
plates of the wing root, in accordance with paragraph B. of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2069, 
Revision 1, dated September 19, 1995. If any discrepancy is found, 
prior to further flight, accomplish follow-on corrective actions 
(i.e. removal of corrosion, corrosion protection, high frequency 
eddy current inspection, x-ray inspection) as applicable, in 
accordance with the service bulletin. Repeat the inspections, as 
applicable, thereafter, at intervals specified in the service 
bulletin.
    (b) If any discrepancy is found as a result of an inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, and Airbus Service Bulletin 
A310-53-2069, Revision 1, dated September 19, 1995, specifies to 
contact Airbus for an appropriate action: Prior to further flight, 
repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. 
Where differences in the compliance times or corrective actions 
exist between the service bulletin and this AD, the AD prevails.
    (c) Accomplishment of the replacement of the chafing plates in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2070, dated October 
3, 1994, constitutes terminating action for the repetitive 
inspection requirement of this AD.
    (d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used if approved by the Manager, International Branch. Operators 
shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal 
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the 
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116.

    Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116.

    (e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where 
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

    Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in French 
airworthiness directive 96-008-175(B), dated January 3, 1996.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 12, 1998.
Gilbert L. Thompson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 98-4249 Filed 2-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P